Retrieve all country codes available in FotMob's football TV guide selector. Use these codes to query TV listings per country.
FotMob TV guide country directory. Lists all country codes exposed by FotMob's public football TV guide country selector.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.6Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does convey that this is a static read-only enum-style listing of country codes. It stops short of stating return format, code style (ISO vs internal), or whether the list is paginated.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource identity. There is minor redundancy between 'country directory' and 'country selector,' but nothing wasteful enough to obscure the purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a trivial zero-parameter directory with no output schema and no annotations, the description says enough for correct invocation. It could add what the resulting codes are used for (country argument to the TV guide) to fully close the loop, but it is adequate as-is.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there are no parameter semantics for the description to explain. The text correctly signals that no inputs are required.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (lists) and resource (country codes from FotMob's TV guide country selector), which cleanly separates it from siblings like fotmob_tv_guide_channels and fotmob_tv_guide. An agent can identify it as the enumeration-lookup tool without opening a schema.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is only implied: the description frames it as a directory feeding the football TV guide, so an agent can infer it should be called before fotmob_tv_guide/_channels. But there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no named alternative, so guidance remains inferential.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.